Annotated Bibliography

 

Works Cited

2mikejohn. "Underage Drinking." Underage Drinking. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://2mikejohn.wordpress.com/cons-of-lowering-drinking-age/>.

This was a blog entry that highlighted the cons of a lowered drinking age. The author stated that a lower drinking age would create many more traffic fatalities and also a higher rate of binge drinkers. This blog only takes on one side of the issue while ignoring the other. The information is factual but the author is not an expert on the subject.

Dean-Mooney, Laura. "A Lower Age Would Be Unsafe." US News. U.S.News & World Report, 08 Sept. 2008. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2008/09/08/a-lower-age-would-be-unsafe>.

This article was the response of Laura Dean-Mooney, the head of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) to the debate of lowering the drinking age. She talks about the catastrophes that will result from a lower drinking age. She also addresses the chemistry of alcohol and its effects on the brain and body. Another point she uses frequently is that there would be more alcohol related deaths should the drinking age be lower.

"The Debate On Lowering The Drinking Age." CBSNews. CBS Interactive, 01 Mar. 2010. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-4813571.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody>.

This is a news article published by CBS News. It was a fairly unbiased article with representation of both sides as well as close scrutiny. The main topic was that the former president of Middlebury College as well as many others, signed a declaration stating that the drinking age of 21 was not working.

"Drinking Age ProCon.org." Drinking Age ProCon.org. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://drinkingage.procon.org/>.

This article was purely research based. It made no attempt to take a side, pro or con. Also all of the information was factual and correct. Even though the list of pros was longer than the cons the article made no effort to persuade the reader in any way.

Engs, Ruth C. "Why Drinking Age Should Be Lowered: Dr. Ruth Engs." Indiana University. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/articles/cqoped.html>.

Ruth Engs is a professor of health at Indiana University. Her writings are based on her observations. She has  more credibility because she actually studied health and alcohol effects. Also she presents factual information to support her observations.

Schlesinger, Robert. "The Drinking Age Debate: Time to Go From 21 to 18, But It's Not an Easy Call." US News. U.S.News & World Report, 23 Feb. 2009. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2009/02/23/the-drinking-age-debate-time-to-go-from-21-to-18-but-its-not-an-easy-call>.

Robert Schlesinger is the direct opposition to Laura Dean-Mooney. He highlights the pros of a lower drinking age. He touches on the idea that if you can vote, fight for your country and serve on a jury then why can’t you have a drink?

Pros and Cons of a Lower Drinking Age

http://drinkingage.procon.org/ 

This article accurately depicts the discussion over the drinking age. It presents pros and cons and the scientific evidence to back it up. What you notice on this list is that the cons list is much shorter than the pros list. With all this balanced knowledge it makes it easier to see that a lowered drinking age is the right choice. This article attacks the information from all sides including information that very few people knew about. For example the federal government bribed 30 states, who had lowered their drinking age, to raise their drinking age to 21 or lose millions of dollars in federal highway funds.

While the cons present many scary results what they don't address is the fact that many of these can be prevented with the proper knowledge. For example, teens who drink alcohol are more likely to binge drink rather than people who are of legal drinking age. However if these teens were properly education on how to drink responsibly that would not be an issue. Another preemptive measure that would be taken, should we reduce the drinking age, would be that to be able to drink you would need to pass a test. Much like drivers ed for getting a license, you would need to take a test and pass to get the right to drink.


 In addition to the cons being less, the pros are much more substantial. Even though the states are given the right to choose what their minimum drinking age should be the government is bribing those states who wished to keep their drinking age under 21. They told these states that if they didn't comply with this change they would take away millions of dollars in federal funds. When the United States decreased the drinking age in the 1980's the rate of traffic fatalities decreased to less than that of a European country whose drinking age was less than 21.

Drinking in College

 http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-4813571.html

I agree with the stance taken on by these college presidents. They see first-hand the damage done by setting the drinking age of 21. Their only interest is keeping their campus safe. With the drinking age being so high you see an increase in underage drinking, because only about half of the student body is of legal drinking age. With the underage drinkers you find they are less likely to take the proper precautions necessary when drinking because they have a fear of being found out or because they don’t have the proper experience with what to you should do after a night of drinking. 

If the drinking age was lowered to 18 most of these problems would be eliminated. The sheer task of enforcing this law is impossible on a campus. Chief of police in Boulder Colorado, Mark Beckner, says "We're not in a situation where we can stop it. The best we can do is try to contain it". Beckner says that he would rather have the drinking age lower so they could focus on more important aspects of protecting the campus. Even through serious crackdowns they saw no difference in the amount of underage drinking, just how far underground it had been pushed.

With a lower drinking age would come better decision making from younger drinkers. It would allow 18 year-olds the opportunity to be safer about their drinking. If there was a lower drinking age teens would be able to drink in a responsible way and make smart decisions without fear of repercussions from the law. A drinking age of 18 is the only safe option for college campuses.

Would a Lower Drinking Age be Safer?

 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2008/09/08/a-lower-age-would-be-unsafe

While Laura Dean-Mooney presents a valid case with her statistics in this article I have to disagree. What she fails to realize is that in countries with a very young or no drinking age there is a significantly lower binge drinking rate as well as alcohol related deaths. There is a very large difference in the lifestyles of European teens versus their American counterparts, we drive more often and at a younger age, thus putting us at more of a risk for drunk driving. However, they are more responsible because they were taught about alcohol in a different way.

Alcohol is a taboo subject in most American households. Both of my parents come from European homes and that has reflected the way we discuss alcohol. My mother believes in no drinking age, she was allowed access to alcohol in her home as an adolescent and never resulted to binge drinking. Why? Because it was always there. There is a national stigma floating around that if you drink alcohol you’re by default cool, we get this from the high drinking age. Teens especially want to seem older and more mature, resulting in risky behaviors reserved for older people. In many other countries the binge drinking rate is lower because of everyone’s ability to get alcohol, thus taking away its “special” qualities and making it commonplace. 

Even thought there has been a decrease in alcohol related deaths since the minimum drinking age was raised to 21, the rate of binge drinking and underage drinking has gone up exponentially. Even though the drinking age is higher that does nothing for the prevention, teens are just finding more and more unsafe and illegal ways around it. Having a drinking age of 21 is just putting more teens at risk for alcohol related deaths and injuries.

History of the Drinking Age

http://www.indiana.edu/~engs/articles/cqoped.html 

Ruth Engs makes a valid point, all of her information is based on facts, however she only discusses one side of the issue thereby diminishing her credibility. On the contrary, the facts the she does present are hard to ignore. After the raise of the drinking age in 1984, the negative effects after drinking increased. Most notably among college students vomiting after drinking, being too hung over to go to class and being in a fight after drinking saw the biggest increase in percentage of drinkers. In addition to this Engs talks about how this drinking age mirrors the issues of prohibition in the 1920’s. During that era even though the sale and consumption of alcohol was illegal, people still chose to ignore that law and it caused other social problems. As well as those issues the prohibition laws were almost impossible to enforce, causing for even more reckless abandon from citizens.

 In 1984 when the drinking age was raised, the effects were disastrous. Most recognizably in college students. After the age was raised to 21 most college students were forced to keep their drinking underground. Thus causing them to drink more because of the lowered ability to. Also because drinking became "wrong" again it became more enticing to drink more. Even after all of this, the rate of drinking and driving incidents has decreased from 1980 to today.


During the 1920's prohibition took place. This was the national law that the sale, consumption and possession of alcohol was illegal. This made alcohol the most attractive its ever been. Speakeasies started popping up everywhere and it became an impossible law to enforce. Today we have the same issue, the drinking laws are almost impossible to contain and law enforcement find it unimportant as well.

Socialization and Alcohol

 http://2mikejohn.wordpress.com/cons-of-lowering-drinking-age/
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2009/02/23/the-drinking-age-debate-time-to-go-from-21-to-18-but-its-not-an-easy-call 

While the author has many factual and important evidence, he fails to look at any of the pros of lowering the drinking age. He states that it is inappropriate to have a lower drinking age in America because people start driving earlier and more often than their European counterparts. While this may be true what he doesn’t look at is how they are socialized against one another. For instance children in Europe are taught that alcohol is a normal thing and that it’s not anything special. For young people in America, alcohol is bad and only intended for adults and mature people. But the way our media portrays things teens and young adults want to be perceived as older and more mature there by increasing the desire to drink. Another point he fails to address properly is the potential increase of alcohol related crashes, while the number of drinkers would increase the difference is that people would be more willing to take alternate uses of transportation if it meant not getting in trouble by parents or law enforcement.

If the drinking age was lowered or even abolished, then it would become easier for people to become educated on the subject. Parents don't want to be the ones to explain things like alcohol abuse and binge drinking to their children. So thy leave it up to schools and the media to tech their kids. This is entirely wrong. Parents are the first line of education. They need to be the ones to socialize their children in the right way that will make them less susceptible to alcohol abuse.

As well as educating teens to lower the rate of binge drinkers, a lower minimum drinking age would allow teens a safe way to drink. I have heard too many stories about underage drinkers who have died from alcohol poisoning because no one called the police or went to the hospital. Why? They were too afraid they would get caught and get in trouble for helping. This is one of the greatest risks regarding underground alcohol consumption.

Robert Schlesinger brings up one of the hottest issues in this debate. How can we trust 18 year-olds to go to war, vote and sit on a jury if we can’t even trust them with a drink? The simple fact is that these laws don’t make sense. The national age of maturity is 18 and in some states, such as North Carolina, are even lower. If we can try a 16 year-old as an adult then we obviously think they are mature enough to handle it. So how can they be sent to jail but not be able to have a beer? At age 18 you can legally purchase a gun in the United States and at 16 you can legally hunt. Why are we trusted with such deadly weapons at such young ages but alcohol is such taboo. This is a direct reflection of how we are socialized about drinking in such a wrong way. The bottom line is that education starts in the home. Parents need to be able to set the tone for safe and responsible drinking.